So Newt pulling ahead means the Tea Party nonsense is over?

[Full-Auto]

You mean the Tea Party's over?
All we have now are unemployed scumbags in need of a shower? (OWS)

 

[peach174]

More than a third of voters - 34 percent - in the South Carolina Republican primary strongly support the Tea Party movement. They overwhelmingly gravitated toward Newt Gingrich, backing him by more than a two-to-one margin over Mitt Romney, 47 percent to 21 percent.

I wouldn't say that the movement is over, based on the above.

Polls also show that Americans across the nation want smaller government.
Fifty-eight percent said they favor a smaller government with fewer services, and only 38 percent said they favor a larger government with more services.

 

[Katzndogz]

According to the exit polls, Gingrich got much of his support from women and from married women.

 

[Seawytch]

It sure means the "Party of Family Values" nonsense is over (at least in SC), that's for sure.

Only if you accept that a failed marriage is the same as approving of all sorts of deviancy...

Most people have been through divorces or bad relationships. It happens.

Ah, so cheating on two sick wives is now "failed marriages". Why not "irreconcilable differences" between him and wife number two? He wanted an open marriage and she did not.

Newt, who has committed adultery multiple times, would like an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America to prevent me from the fundamental right to legal, civil marriage.

I, who have never cheated on my life partner, do not wish to amend the Constitution of the United States to prevent him from his "immoral behavior".

Did you know that most Americans view what he did as more "deviant" than my consenting adult relationship? True story...

(sorry, updated)

 

[logical4u]

It sure means the "Party of Family Values" nonsense is over (at least in SC), that's for sure.

That nonsense will be over nationally if serial adulterer/open marriage guy runs against President Obama, whose personal 'family values' are unassailable.

That "President" had a man come forward, years ago and claim to be his lover. The press did not "investigate it". They ridiculed and disregarded the man (so unlike the women that came forward against Herman Cain) that essentially destroyed a man on he said, she said. Question: if his "family values" are so.... unassailable, why doesn't he travel with his family? Why doesn't he travel with his "women" family members (maybe his "family values" are more in-line with islam family values)?

 

[JoeB131]

Ah, so cheating on two sick wives is now "failed marriages". Why not "irreconcilable differences" between him and wife number two? He wanted an open marriage and she did not.

Well, first, you are assuming that Marrianne isn't just a bitter woman making stuff up. If this was the case, why didn't she bring it up in their divorce 12 years ago?

Second, Marriane wasn't sick and Jackie wasn't that sick. You guys have her on her deathbed pretty much. Not recovering from a benign tumor and signing papers for a divorce she wanted as much as he did.

Newt, who has committed adultery multiple times, would like an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America to prevent me from the fundamental right to legal, civil marriage.

I, who have never cheated on my life partner, do not wish to amend the Constitution of the United States to prevent him from his "immoral behavior".

But here's the thing. Every time gay marriage is brought up for a vote, it loses. Even in a place like California. People don't want to redefine marriage, and they don't want activist judges redefining it for them. Personally, I think amending the constitution on this issue would be a horrible idea and a practical impossibility.

I also think it's kind of silly for Republicans to worry about a constituency that wasn't going to vote for any Republican.

Did you know that most Americans view what he did as more "deviant" than my consenting adult relationship? True story...

(sorry, updated)

Yes, a whole lot of people disapproving of behavior they engage in....

fact is, if they were that upset about it, Clinton's career would have been over when they found out he was planting Flowers.

 

[Stephanie]

It sure means the "Party of Family Values" nonsense is over (at least in SC), that's for sure.

That nonsense will be over nationally if serial adulterer/open marriage guy runs against President Obama, whose personal 'family values' are unassailable.

yeah we all know he's a saint..
But we aren't looking for a saint right now... it seems the people don't want someone who wants to Transform the county we all love and he hates.

 

[Katzndogz]

South Carolina just gave you a conservative version of an occupy protest. This is occupy the vote.

They don't care about Gingrich's past marriages, they are looking for someone to give obama a political bloody nose. When Romney hesitated and stumbled not giving decisive answers he would do the same with obama. Having past acts of whatever kind is a weakness, now how does the candidate deal with that weakness. That's what they were looking at, not the accusations, but how those accusations were handled. If Romney is going to step on his tongue in a republican debate, he will lose his teeth in a debate with obama.

I don't know that democrats yet "get it". The vote in South Carolina was an act of defiance. Defiance against the democrats and against republicans. It was the voice of popular rage. It was the real voice of the 99%.

 

[Seawytch]

Ah, so cheating on two sick wives is now "failed marriages". Why not "irreconcilable differences" between him and wife number two? He wanted an open marriage and she did not.

Well, first, you are assuming that Marrianne isn't just a bitter woman making stuff up. If this was the case, why didn't she bring it up in their divorce 12 years ago?

Second, Marriane wasn't sick and Jackie wasn't that sick. You guys have her on her deathbed pretty much. Not recovering from a benign tumor and signing papers for a divorce she wanted as much as he did.

Marrianne making what up? He cheated on her, we all KNOW he cheated on her and she certainly knows that she cheated WITH him on Newt's first wife. All this stuff was brought up in her original interview with Esquire, many years ago. (not the open marriage part, but that's really just frosting on the already laden cake)

Poo pooing with a "they weren't that sick" isn't going to cut it either. This shit WILL NOT play well on a national stage, especially when you compare him with our President, who is still married to his first wife.

Newt, who has committed adultery multiple times, would like an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America to prevent me from the fundamental right to legal, civil marriage.

I, who have never cheated on my life partner, do not wish to amend the Constitution of the United States to prevent him from his "immoral behavior".

But here's the thing. Every time gay marriage is brought up for a vote, it loses. Even in a place like California. People don't want to redefine marriage, and they don't want activist judges redefining it for them. Personally, I think amending the constitution on this issue would be a horrible idea and a practical impossibility.

I also think it's kind of silly for Republicans to worry about a constituency that wasn't going to vote for any Republican.

Boy oh boy, you have NOT been paying attention. That tide has turned and now even a majority of Americans support allowing legal recognition of our relationships. In California that number is even greater than on a national scale and yet all three of the GOP candidates for President want to amend the Constitution. Americans don't support that, why do they?

Do you know who won legal marriage for gays in New York? Republican donors. The Republicans have written off the black vote, the Latino vote, the gay vote and a lot of the female vote. Who they got left?

Did you know that most Americans view what he did as more "deviant" than my consenting adult relationship? True story...

(sorry, updated)

Yes, a whole lot of people disapproving of behavior they engage in....

fact is, if they were that upset about it, Clinton's career would have been over when they found out he was planting Flowers.

You guys keep trying, but Clinton and Gingrich aren't the same.

 

[Gagafritz]

Do you know who won legal marriage for gays in New York? Republican donors. The Republicans have written off the black vote, the Latino vote, the gay vote and a lot of the female vote. Who they got left?

They have the right!

 

[Gagafritz]

As for the "female vote", i love how commentators and others think they know what the "female" vote is. It is really derogatory to think women cannot think for themselves or that we vote based on looks or whatever. And, they tried this tactic for Newt and plenty of women vote for Newt. So, sorry, i hope most women vote on issues like me.

 

[Seawytch]

Do you know who won legal marriage for gays in New York? Republican donors. The Republicans have written off the black vote, the Latino vote, the gay vote and a lot of the female vote. Who they got left?

They have the right!

No, they have the far right...and the 1% who $upport them.

 

[Gagafritz]

Stand up for what you believe and whether it is 1% or 99% doesn't matter. Rise or go down in flames on what you really believe. I am sick of glib politicians just trying to pander and tell us what they think we want to hear. I can respect someone enacting their principles even if i don't agree. But, i dont' want anymore liars or smarmy politicians trying to play whatever card or flavor of the moment. I respect Newt's tell it like it is approach and here is what i think and take me as i am approach. At times he can be really irritating but i can stand back and disagree and at least know what direction he is going and what he really thinks versus just more bland Telepromptering.

 

[peach174]

Do you know who won legal marriage for gays in New York? Republican donors. The Republicans have written off the black vote, the Latino vote, the gay vote and a lot of the female vote. Who they got left?

They have the right!

No, they have the far right...and the 1% who $support them.

The extreme far left is in this administration right now.
58% of the nation wants smaller government. I don't call that extreme far right.

 

[grunt11b]

Kinda looks that way to me.
Or is Leroy now the Tea Party darling?

I'm not sure if you have been paying attention or not, but the tea party never endorsed one GOP candidate that is running right now. I have no idea what you are talking about in this thread.

 

[grunt11b]

if the tea party's objective was to reduce the size of government or reduce our national debt, then it's been dead since it started.

Let's see, it began while the democrats had control of both chambers and the white house, the Democrats have lost the house but still control the senate and the white house. SO exactly what power has the tea party ever had to meet it's objectives? Or do you not understand how politics work and just want to blow more smoke out of your ass?

 

[grunt11b]

This thread reeks of fear.

 

[WillowTree]

This thread reeks of fear.

"fear" is a code word for "racist"..

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So Newt pulling ahead means the Tea Party nonsense is over?

One certainly hopes so.

The TPM wasn’t only about ‘family values,’ although a rather large component of the TPM was concerned with that ‘issue’ – made up mostly of the Old Bush Base – the primary thrust was government corruption, and in that the TPM’s support of Gingrich is equally hypocritical.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

if the tea party's objective was to reduce the size of government or reduce our national debt, then it's been dead since it started.

Let's see, it began while the democrats had control of both chambers and the white house, the Democrats have lost the house but still control the senate and the white house. SO exactly what power has the tea party ever had to meet it's objectives? Or do you not understand how politics work and just want to blow more smoke out of your ass?

do you believe, when republicans regain power, that the size of government will be reduced or the national debt will decrease?